Modeling and Simulation for Architecture: Breakout

Modeling and Simulation for Architecture: Breakout Participants Mike P.Chris C.Jim K. John H.Sudhakar Y.Luiz C.Steve R.Wilf P. Jim K. . Arun R.Krste A.Dave M. Doe H.Y.Derek C.Lizy J.Kevin L.Dean K.Karen B. Shekhar B. Moderator and Scribe Darren K. and Arun R.

High level • Lots of discussion about the SW Issues & Apps • Major concern on interaction & interfaces • between communities • “common language” • Good at iterative development • Need good starting points • Need an informed path • Lots of discussion of HW Design space • Caution over multiple metrics • Know performance well • Weaker on power • don’t know about reliability • Cost very hard, but very important • “Cultural” Barriers & IP Issues

1. Object of Modeling: What to Model • Goal: “Make Design Decisions” • Gain Insight • “Common Language” “Shared Testbed” • Need to Support Co-design Loop • Arch. want Application models • Apps. want Architecture models • Abstraction is needed to deal with Complexity • Different goals for different times/audiences • Design exploration in terms of power, performance, reliability, and cost • Design validation • SW development • Lots of parameters in the design space

2. Can we do it now • Good at iterative refinement • Lots of discussion on need for abstract model w/ parameters & trend lines (abstract machine model) • Iteratively approaches • Iterative series of definitions (multiple scopes, levels of abstraction) • Good at evolutionary approaches • captures key parameters • capture disruptive changes • Correct abstractions are CRITICAL • Caution: radical changes make things difficult, uncertain • Hard to jump 10+ years out

3. Gaps • Some research gaps, some interactional gaps • “Cultural Barriers” • IP: what is precompetitive? what can we share? • App. vs. HW vs. compiler vs. OS etc... • Skeleton Applications & Skeleton Architectures • Multiple levels • Correct abstractions • Not assume a single execution model • Need way to interact between HW & SW • Fidelity vs. Time vs. Scale tradeoffs (decomposability) • Methodology • What scale? what abstractions? • Need community consensus of what is needed • Roadmap of Modeling capabilities

Gaps (cont.) • Infrastructure • Technology models • Lots of discussion for tech. models for disruptive technologies and how we trust them • Modeling Testbed • Bring together architecture & application skeletons @ Multiple levels of abstraction w/ Technology Modeling • Resources • Access to state of art machines for simulation • Access to state of art machines for validation

4. Community of Interaction • Application Teams (Co-Design Centers) • Also, OS, Runtime, Compiler • Different facets within architecture teams • Memory • Processor • Network • Device-level & High level • Need lots of cross-cutting interaction

5. Measure for Success • #1: No Surprises in Deployed Machine • Infrastructure is available, used, and broadly accepted • Influence is demonstrated • Impact of methodology is demonstrated • We know which gaps we filled

Modeling and Simulation for Architecture: Breakout